I used to have a recurring dream I was behind Brett Favre at a fast food drive through and after he was done getting his food he would start to drive out, but kept backing up for one more item over and over again.

Seriously, that whole retiring-unretiring thing wore me out with him. You can say ESPN exasperated the situation with the helicopter escort to the "signing" and so on, but Favre was digging the attention to a major fault.

Having said that I did enjoy the article and found that maybe I did need to be reminded that his greatness was, at least in part, due to the fact that he genuinely loved to play the game. That isn't always the case, even with the best of them.

He hung around a lot of years and is #1 in lots of career categories. Most TD passes. Most Completions. Most Yards Passing. Most Interceptions Thrown. Most Fumbles. Most inappropriate sexts.

The teams he played on won a lot of games. Quite a few games won because of him. But also a LOT of games lost because of him. A lot of QBs have made the plays to win more games that their teams would have lost otherwise than Favre has. But none have made as many plays to lose games that their teams would have won otherwise.

Favre is a better QB than Trent Dilfer. If Dilfer had been the Packers QB the year Favre's team won the Super Bowl they would not have won the Super Bowl because Dilfer could not have led them to the wins. But if Favre's had been the Raven's QB the year Dilfer won the Super Bowl, it's a 80% chance they would not have won because Favre probably would have blown one of the playoff games trying to show off. Like he did most years.

Saying Favre is top 5 is showing the same lack of respect for the game that Favre displayed. That is being awed by the career statistics. I'm more impressed by someone who makes the plays to win and avoids the plays to lose, such as Joe Montana. Even on the Packers, I'll take Bart Starr and his 5 NFL Championships (and his per game averages of 9 completions on 16 attempts for 126 yards) over Favre.

I will put Favre on the top 5 list... of Packers QBs (although some people may feel I am slighting Cecil Isbell and Irv Comp).

It is not just that he is the all time leader in interceptions thrown - that comes long with the other career records due to the longevity. It is that he threw so many idiotic throws that never had a chance and cost his team the game just because he couldn't rein his ego in.

The idiotic interception is not everything about his career, but the other things have been done by other people. Dan Marino had huge career stats. Peyton Manning will have huge career stats. Bradshaw and Montana won more Super Bowls. But the awesomely stupid interception - that really is a Favre thing. It is what truly makes his career unique.

His first regular season pass ever was intercepted and returned for a TD. His last pass as a Packer was an interception to lose the NFC Championship game. And the last play of his career (the second most memorable play of his career) fittingly summed up and typified his entire career: an idiotic interception to lose the NFC Championship game when they were already in field goal range. Goodnight Brett!

I agree with this 100%. Favre was a decent QB who played for a team that gave him an UNBELIEVABLE amount of LEE-WAY. After all, he got traded TO the Packers from Atlanta. There were plenty of QB's with more talent, and played with more precision because THEY KNEW THEY HAD TO.

Favre was AI-IGHT, nothin' more. I'm glad he retired, because I got tired of his wishy-washyness about playing was killing my NFL Network-watchin' during the offseason.

__________________Coach O'Brien just might lead the Texans to their first 35-0 thumping of a decent opponent in 2014.

I think winning that one SB early in his career was more of a curse for him than a blessing. It allowed him to continue doing what he was doing and basically half-assing most things without really having to take the next step in his development.

For me, Brett Favre was like Terry Bradshaw with more talent. He was gutsy and tough and never saw a throw he didn't like. If he could have learned just a little more self-control and discipline, he could have been tons better and instead of just winning 1 SB, he could have won several.

BUT.

Like I said. You look back at his career and he did some amazing things and he did them for a long time. You've got to be able to appreciate that.

Any Texan fan has good reason to "hate" Aaron Rogers and Tom Brady after last season.

Because our team was not as good as we thought it was?....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Showtime100

Seriously, that whole retiring-unretiring thing wore me out with him. You can say ESPN exasperated the situation with the helicopter escort to the "signing" and so on, but Favre was digging the attention to a major fault.

That stuff never bothered me. There's this neat little feature on my remote control that turns off the TV and another one that actually changes the channel. Pretty cool. You should check it out.

As far as Favre is concerned - in general - he did what I expect from my football players to the best of his ability: ENTERTAIN ME. Were you folks not entertained?

I think too many people elevate a game above and beyond what it is in the big picture. It's just a game, regardless of what the media, hall of fame, and fanatics want you to believe. Heck, there are about three billion people in China and India that could not care less about our NFL and its history.

__________________"Football is only a diversion." ~ Houston Texans, Inc.

That stuff never bothered me. There's this neat little feature on my remote control that turns off the TV and another one that actually changes the channel. Pretty cool. You should check it out.

Lol, I hear you and one of these day's I'm going to get one of those remote thingofajigs.

The problem I had at the time was there were only so many sports outlets from which to choose and, while I believe in covering the top stories to their fullest, thought ESPN was waaaaay over the top. I wanted the latest on the Favre story and then to move on.

Funny thing was, ESPN was being so incredibly overbearing about the story, that in itself became the trainwreck from which I could not stop watching. (the joke was on me)

As I said, though, now that I'm no longer sick of all that, I can now remember and appreciate his career for what it was, which was outstanding.

I used to have a recurring dream I was behind Brett Favre at a fast food drive through and after he was done getting his food he would start to drive out, but kept backing up for one more item over and over again.

That never bothered me. I wish the coaches in this league wold have the gnads to say, "He's Brett Favre, he won't be at OTAs, mini-camp, or camp. He's not going to play in the preseason. We have respect for what he's done for this organization & we trust he'll be ready to go week 1."

But they don't, so you have Favre saying, "I don't know...... " when he knew all along.

Same thing with Ed Reed. He's not going to going to play in the preseason, but he'll be ready to go week 1. He's a physical specimen, he knows how to play the game....

As far as Favre is concerned - in general - he did what I expect from my football players to the best of his ability: ENTERTAIN ME. Were you folks not entertained?

Of course he was always entertaining. As I said before, if highlights (entertainment) are what you want Favre and Barry Sanders are your dream backfield.

It was entertaining when Jerry Glanville whipped out the "Stagger Lee" play in the playoffs. It was entertaining when the Texans Chris Brown threw the halfback interception instead of (boringly) pounding the ball into the endzone for a TD. Not always effective plays for winning, but definitely effective for entertainment. Those (Pencil Neck, Dexman, Fred) who root for a team to win the game did not enjoy those plays so much, but I am sure that those (Double Barrel, eriadoc, Texecutioner, Rey) who value entertainment over winning thought they were great plays.

__________________
Warning! If this post does not appear to contain sarcasm, someone has probably hacked my account!

Championships are important, but using it as the bottom line on how you rate individual players in a team game is maybe one of the more ridiculous things I've heard today.

And this morning I heard a guy trying to sell shoe laces.

You are better than this, Rey. Read a post before you respond to it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred

Favre is a better QB than Trent Dilfer.

And I thought it went without saying but obviously Marino is a better QB than Favre (thus better than Dilfer). If Favre had been on Marino's Dolphins teams - still zero championships. If Marino had been on Favre's Packers teams - probably 3 or 4 championships instead of one.

I don't rate Montana ahead of Favre or Smith ahead of Sanders because they won more Super Bowls. As those who read my posts know I rate them ahead because:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred

I'm more impressed by someone who makes the plays to win and avoids the plays to lose

and

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred

when it comes to winning championships I'll take the guy who converts 98% of 3rd and 2 to a first down over the guy who converts 60% but pops 5% for a 40 yard gain.

There are great players who never won even one team championship. And there are some not so great players who have won multiple team championships (here's to you Robert Horry and Chuck Nevitt!) However in general I do not think it is merely a coincidence that players who can make the plays to win and avoid the plays to lose (such as Montana, Starr, Herber, Smith) tend to win more championships than those who either can't make the plays to win (Dilfer, Carr) or who can't avoid the plays to lose (Favre, Sanders).

__________________
Warning! If this post does not appear to contain sarcasm, someone has probably hacked my account!

Those (Pencil Neck, Dexman, Fred) who root for a team to win the game did not enjoy those plays so much, but I am sure that those (Double Barrel, eriadoc, Texecutioner, Rey) who value entertainment over winning thought they were great plays.

You say that like you're busting your ass out there on the field.

You are WATCHING the games like the rest of us, skippy. Perhaps you should live less vicariously through an entertainment medium, where someone else winning games validates your vapid existence, and go outside and soak up some sunshines.

I get it, you're one of those "we guys". WE WON WE WON! Settle down, they won and you watched [Seinfeld blast].

Keep it in perspective. You are nothing but a CONSUMER- nothing more - no matter how many Texans-themed products you wrap yourself in.

I lost all that rah-rah goofiness and lack of real world perspective with 35-3. Since then, it is only entertainment because...IT IS ONLY ENTERTAINMENT.

Even Houston Texans, Inc. said that football is only a diversion.

__________________"Football is only a diversion." ~ Houston Texans, Inc.

You are WATCHING the games like the rest of us, skippy. Perhaps you should live less vicariously through an entertainment medium, where someone else winning games validates your vapid existence, and go outside and soak up some sunshines.

I get it, you're one of those "we guys". WE WON WE WON! Settle down, they won and you watched [Seinfeld blast].

Keep it in perspective. You are nothing but a CONSUMER- nothing more - no matter how many Texans-themed products you wrap yourself in.

I lost all that rah-rah goofiness and lack of real world perspective with 35-3. Since then, it is only entertainment because...IT IS ONLY ENTERTAINMENT.

Even Houston Texans, Inc. said that football is only a diversion.

Oh please. What I wrote is nothing like I think I'm out on the field. You are way over stretching a point (exactly the kind of thing I usually do!) in order to work in the Seinfeld reference (which is awesome, nice job).

I know I am just a consumer - still wearing the same jerseys I got off the discount rack at the end of the 2005 season. But my existence is vapid whether I think I get validation because someone else won a game or not.

I suppose it is entertainment either way. I find it more entertaining when I am rooting for one of the teams to win (or in some cases lose). If I have no interest in the outcome of the game then I will probably not watch it hoping that some incredibly artistic plays break out.

I understand the "too cool to care" Seinfeldian detachment. It is fun to make fun of anyone who cheers something as silly as a play in a football game. It doesn't bother you when the home team loses, but then again you don't have as much fun when they win. But that's OK, because "you're cool". You can say things like "I really enjoyed watching Quin bat the ball right to the Jaguars receiver for the game winning TD. It wouldn't have been nearly as entertaining if he batted it out of bounds or just intercepted it."

We choose to take our enjoyment different ways. Again (for at least the third time) for your way Brett Favre, Brett Sanders, Stagger Lee, and a team blowing a 32 point lead are greatest of all time. For me not so much.

__________________
Warning! If this post does not appear to contain sarcasm, someone has probably hacked my account!

Oh please. What I wrote is nothing like I think I'm out on the field. You are way over stretching a point (exactly the kind of thing I usually do!) in order to work in the Seinfeld reference (which is awesome, nice job).

I know I am just a consumer - still wearing the same jerseys I got off the discount rack at the end of the 2005 season. But my existence is vapid whether I think I get validation because someone else won a game or not.

I suppose it is entertainment either way. I find it more entertaining when I am rooting for one of the teams to win (or in some cases lose). If I have no interest in the outcome of the game then I will probably not watch it hoping that some incredibly artistic plays break out.

I understand the "too cool to care" Seinfeldian detachment. It is fun to make fun of anyone who cheers something as silly as a play in a football game. It doesn't bother you when the home team loses, but then again you don't have as much fun when they win. But that's OK, because "you're cool". You can say things like "I really enjoyed watching Quin bat the ball right to the Jaguars receiver for the game winning TD. It wouldn't have been nearly as entertaining if he batted it out of bounds or just intercepted it."

We choose to take our enjoyment different ways. Again (for at least the third time) for your way Brett Favre, Brett Sanders, Stagger Lee, and a team blowing a 32 point lead are greatest of all time. For me not so much.

The bolded contains events that are not related.

Why should I give a rat's ass about Brett Favre's or Brett Sanders' (whoever Brett Sanders is ) teams when they were NEVER the teams I rooted for?

That makes absolutely no sense. It is nonsense assumption babble as far as I'm concerned.

You made a statement about me - "who value entertainment over winning thought they were great plays" - because I have no emotional ties to teams not based in Houston?

Do you honestly walk around sulking because Brett Favre threw a lot of picks? Is your well being tied to something as irrelevant as what a football player, who you have no personal connection with, does in his career?

Seriously, man, your broad brush paints you more than it does anyone else.

Worry about yourself and speak for yourself. I would have not replied if you had kept my moniker off your keyboard. You do not know me and certainly have no basis for making such a statement based on some words on an internet forum.

BTW, I'm not making fun of anyone. I can only express my own personal perspectives, which is that I will never live vicariously through an entertainment medium that I have absolutely no influence on the outcome.

Do I get emotionally invested during a Texans game? Of course. But, as soon as it's over, it's over. No different than the joy I experience at a good metal concert or a new episode of Breaking Bad, entertainment mediums that I have a passion for. However, it is always a momentary diversion that I allow myself to escape in, but once it's over, back to reality and none of that nasty emotional aftertaste because I choose to keep it in proper perspective.

If you need / want to live a life where your emotional well-being is directly tied to entertainment, so be it. But please get off your condescending high horse that somehow you are better than someone that chooses to keep it all in proper perspective.

__________________"Football is only a diversion." ~ Houston Texans, Inc.

Why should I give a rat's ass about Brett Favre's or Brett Sanders' (whoever Brett Sanders is ) teams when they were NEVER the teams I rooted for?

That makes absolutely no sense. It is nonsense assumption babble as far as I'm concerned.

You made a statement about me - "who value entertainment over winning thought they were great plays" - because I have no emotional ties to teams not based in Houston?

Do you honestly walk around sulking because Brett Favre threw a lot of picks? Is your well being tied to something as irrelevant as what a football player, who you have no personal connection with, does in his career?

Seriously, man, your broad brush paints you more than it does anyone else.

Worry about yourself and speak for yourself. I would have not replied if you had kept my moniker off your keyboard. You do not know me and certainly have no basis for making such a statement based on some words on an internet forum.

BTW, I'm not making fun of anyone. I can only express my own personal perspectives, which is that I will never live vicariously through an entertainment medium that I have absolutely no influence on the outcome.

Do I get emotionally invested during a Texans game? Of course. But, as soon as it's over, it's over. No different than the joy I experience at a good metal concert or a new episode of Breaking Bad, entertainment mediums that I have a passion for. However, it is always a momentary diversion that I allow myself to escape in, but once it's over, back to reality and none of that nasty emotional aftertaste because I choose to keep it in proper perspective.

If you need / want to live a life where your emotional well-being is directly tied to entertainment, so be it. But please get off your condescending high horse that somehow you are better than someone that chooses to keep it all in proper perspective.

For someone who is so detached from enjoying a football game you certainly are getting worked up over posts on a message board. You are losing the ironic hip cool Seinfeldian quality. Now you are changing your tune and saying that you do get emotionally invested during a Texans game when your previous posts said that anyone who did that was a "we" person who thought they were actually on the field and that they needed to get perspective and abandon their rah-rah goofiness. You are the one on the high horse telling others that their existence is vapid and their priorities in life are all wrong. But now you admit you are one of us! Hey guess what? When the games are over, its over for me too, my emotional well being is not tied to the outcome of a game, which makes our outlook the same. Sorry if I interpreted your previous posts as if you actually meant what you were saying.

Since you apparently did not read most of the thread my comments on Favre were directed at the assertion that he way "top 5 of all time." I explained he was not top 5 for traits of winning championships. You weighed it with "it's only entertainment and he was entertaining". I agreed with you he is great for entertaining (probably "top 5 of all time").

Where do you make up this crap about me being upset over the fact that Favre made a bunch of stupid plays? I never rooted for a team he played for, I thought it was great entertainment. But I could see where fans of his team could get frustrated. During the game. Then I am sure they got over it and got back to their vapid existences. I just pointed out the facts that his style was not top 5 for winning; maybe your concern for people's emotional well-being should be directed to those who got butt-hurt over those facts.

The items you bolded are alike. For the detached observer they are entertaining. The detached observer (as you initially claimed to be but now deny that you are) would rather see the pass deflected to the receiver for a last second TD than batted down. The detached observer would rather see a team with a 2 point lead running flea flicker plays than the victory formation.

For your information, Brett Sanders is the love child of Brett Favre and Barry Sanders. His signature play is taking the first snap of the quarter and scrambling until the quarter expires and then firing a perfect pass 70 yards in the air for a completion - which loses 5 yards because he was 75 yards behind the line of scrimmage when he threw it.

__________________
Warning! If this post does not appear to contain sarcasm, someone has probably hacked my account!

For someone who is so detached from enjoying a football game you certainly are getting worked up over posts on a message board.

If you say so, skippy.

I have neither the desire nor energy right now to reply to all those words, much less read all of them. I'm honored that you would waste so much of your time typing them for little ol' me, though. TYVM

__________________"Football is only a diversion." ~ Houston Texans, Inc.

Favre just did not know how to quit or when. As if he probably did that, he would not have been in the mess he is in with the Packers these days. As the fans of GB also hold a grudge against Brett despite all he has done for them! And with the team!